Nuevo Regístrate gratis, 10 llamadas de regalo. Hasta 1 $, sin tarjeta.

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro vs Claude Sonnet 5.5

vs

Cuál usar y cuándo

Dola-Seed-2.0-pro es la opción más barata a $0.5 de entrada y $3 de salida por millón frente a $2 y $10 de claude-sonnet-5-5; esto es 4x menos en entrada y aproximadamente 3.3x menos en salida, con lecturas de caché a $0.1 frente a $0.2, y es el único de los dos que acepta video junto con texto e imágenes, además de que su pensamiento se puede desactivar. Elija claude-sonnet-5-5 cuando necesite el contexto de 1,000,000 tokens en lugar de 256,000; su salida máxima es de 128,000 tokens frente a 131,072. Ambos cubren chat, código, razonamiento y herramientas y devuelven solo texto.

Precios

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro Claude Sonnet 5.5 Δ
Entrada / 1M tokens $0.5 $2 0.25×
Salida / 1M tokens $3 $10 0.3×
Lectura de caché / 1M tokens $0.1 $0.2 0.5×
Escritura en caché - 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h) -

Tarifas del catálogo en vivo en el momento de la compilación; la página de cada modelo incluye la ficha actualizada.

Dónde se sitúan - precio de entrada por 1M de tokens en todos los 76 modelos de chat en esta unidad de facturación (escala logarítmica)

Capacidades

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro Claude Sonnet 5.5
Uso de herramientas sí sí
Control de pensamiento configurable siempre activo
Salida estructurada - sí
Caché de prompt implícito + explícito explícito (marcas el prefijo)
Tiempo de vida de la caché no publicado 5m default, 1h option
Prefijo mínimo en caché 1024 tokens 1024 tokens

Especificaciones

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro Claude Sonnet 5.5
Modalidades de entrada texto imagen vídeo texto imagen
Modalidades de salida texto texto
Lanzamiento 2026-02-14 2026-09-28
Límite de conocimiento - 2026-06
Ventana de contexto 256K 1M
Salida máxima 131K 128K
Parámetro de pensamiento
  • thinking.type
  • reasoning_effort
thinking.type
Valores aceptados
thinking.type
  • enabled
  • disabled (no auto)
reasoning_effort
  • minimal
  • low
  • medium
  • high
thinking.type
  • adaptive (default)
  • between_tools
Predeterminado enabled, with reasoning_effort medium and thinking summary on adaptive, effort high

Las especificaciones se transcriben de la documentación de cada proveedor; si un proveedor no publica una fila, se omite en lugar de inferirse. Fuentes completas: Dola Seed 2.0 Pro · Claude Sonnet 5.5

Un prompt, ambos modelos - medido a través del gateway

PROMPT Explain to a CFO, in exactly three sentences, why our LLM bill doubled after we enabled reasoning. COMPROBAR exactamente 3 frases

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro superado · 3 sentences

Reasoning-enabled LLMs do not generate final answers in one pass: they run hundreds of unshown internal trial, cross-check, and correction steps for every user request, and every one of these hidden steps consumes billable GPU time just like the visible output text. Unlike our prior standard chat workload which only processed exactly what users typed, reasoning mode automatically executes these validation loops by default, with no visible indicator to end users that extra compute is being consumed. This 2x increase is not a billing error or rogue usage spike: industry benchmarks consistently put reasoning workloads at 1.7-2.6x the compute cost of equivalent standard LLM requests, and this pricing dynamic is almost never clearly disclosed on vendor rate cards.

salida 563 tok (+416 pensamiento) latencia 9.4 s

Claude Sonnet 5.5 superado · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning makes the model "think" before it answers, and that internal thinking is generated as extra text (reasoning tokens) that we are billed for at the same rate as output tokens, even though users never see it. Output tokens also cost several times more than input tokens, so a single request that used to produce a short answer can now generate many times more billable text behind the scenes. Because our request volume and prompts didn't change, the doubling comes almost entirely from this hidden thinking, and we can bring it down by limiting reasoning effort, turning it off for simple tasks, and reserving it for the workloads where the accuracy gain justifies the cost.

salida 205 tok latencia 3.6 s

Seguimiento de la instrucción (exactamente tres frases - contables), adaptación a la audiencia (registro de CFO), y la brecha de facturación por pensamiento oculto que los medidores de tokens de abajo dejan ver.

PROMPT This function is supposed to return the longest run of consecutive equal items, but callers report it is off by one on single-element inputs and misses runs that end at the last index. Fix it and explain the bug in one paragraph. COMPROBAR el arreglo pasa las pruebas

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro superado · 8/8 cases

### Corrected Implementation ```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 best = max(best, cur) else: cur = 1 return best ``` --- ### Bug Explanation The original code has three critical linked flaws: 1. It initialized run counters `best` and `cur` to `0` instead of `1`, failing to account for the fact that *every individual element is already a valid run of length 1* -- this causes single-element inputs to incorrectly return `0`. 2. `cur` only counted how many extra matching elements followed the start of a run, so it always tracked one less than the actual run length, and it reset to `0` (instead of `1`) when a new run began, preserving this off-by-one error for all runs. 3. […]

salida 1278 tok (+951 pensamiento) latencia 16.7 s

Claude Sonnet 5.5 superado · 8/8 cases

**The bug:** `cur` counts the number of *adjacent equal pairs* rather than the number of items in the run. A run of length k contains only k−1 such pairs, so every result is one too small. The counter also starts at 0 and the loop starts at index 1, so a single-element list never updates `best` and returns 0 instead of 1. (An empty list should return 0.) In addition, `cur` resets to 0 on a mismatch, when it should reset to 1, because the item at `xs[i]` begins a new run of length 1. The claim that it "misses runs ending at the last index" is really the same off-by-one: the final run is counted, but as one less than its true length. Because `best` is updated inside the loop on every extension, the last run isn't skipped. […]

salida 444 tok latencia 6.7 s

Si el arreglo es realmente correcto (ejecutable), la densidad de la explicación, y la eficiencia en tokens sobre una tarea acotada.

PROMPT Extract a JSON object with fields {company, quarter, revenue_usd_m, growth_pct, guidance} from this text. Use null for anything not stated; add no other fields. COMPROBAR JSON válido, esquema exacto

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro superado · 5/5 fields, guidance null

{ "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": null }

salida 506 tok (+452 pensamiento) latencia 8.6 s

Claude Sonnet 5.5 superado · 5/5 fields, guidance null

Here is the extracted JSON: ```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": null } ``` Notes on the choices: - **quarter**: The text says "September quarter" without specifying a fiscal year or Q-number, so I kept the wording as stated. - **revenue_usd_m**: The text gives "412" for the topline, with no currency or unit stated explicitly. I've taken it as 412 million USD per the field definition, but the text does not confirm that, and the figure is constant-currency. - **growth_pct**: "Eleven and change" means slightly above 11, so 11 is an approximation. The exact figure isn't given. - **guidance**: Guidance is withheld pending the Q4 close, so no guidance is stated, hence null.

salida 300 tok latencia 3.5 s

Obediencia al esquema (sin campos inventados), presión de alucinación (guidance se retiene explícitamente), y diferencias en la ruta de salida estructurada.

PROMPT Write a 120-word product announcement for an API gateway feature that caches prompts across providers. Forbidden words: "seamless", "unlock", "game-changer", "revolutionize", "empower". Exactly one sentence must be a question. COMPROBAR 120 palabras, 0 palabras prohibidas

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro superado · 123 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Today we’re rolling out cross-provider prompt caching for our API gateway. For engineering teams routing LLM requests across OpenAI, Anthropic, Mistral and open source models, this feature stores identical prompt payloads at the gateway layer, rather than relying on per-provider cache implementations limited to single endpoints. How much time and compute could your team save by avoiding redundant token processing for repeated system prompts, context windows, or common user queries? Cache hits return responses in under 10ms, with configurable TTL, granular purge controls, and per-application cache partitioning. Early access teams running support bots, batch inference and internal assistants recorded 42-67% lower LLM spend. This feature is live for all gateway users today, with no required code changes to existing routing workflows. (120 words)

salida 1041 tok (+872 pensamiento) latencia 11.4 s

Claude Sonnet 5.5 superado · 122 words, 0 banned, 1 question

**Introducing Cross-Provider Prompt Caching** Your API gateway now caches prompts across every connected LLM provider, whether you route traffic to OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, or a self-hosted model. Here's how it works: the gateway fingerprints each prompt prefix, stores it centrally, and applies the right provider-specific caching mechanism automatically. When you switch providers or fail over during an outage, your cached context follows you. Early testing shows input token costs dropping by up to 70% on repeated system prompts and long documents, with latency improvements of 40% or more on cache hits. Tired of paying to send the same instructions thousands of times a day? Enable it with one configuration flag. Cache rules, TTLs, and per-team isolation are available in the dashboard today.

salida 266 tok latencia 3.8 s

Obediencia a las restricciones (presupuesto de palabras, lista de palabras prohibidas, la única pregunta), huella de estilo, y control de la longitud.

Cambia entre ellos con una línea

Ambos IDs están en cada pestaña a continuación - el par de líneas resaltadas es la única edición. Mismo endpoint, misma clave, misma estructura de solicitud.

from openai import OpenAI

client = OpenAI(
    base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
    api_key="sk-syn-...",
)

resp = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="Dola-Seed-2.0-pro",
    # model="claude-sonnet-5-5",  # descomenta esta línea, comenta la de arriba
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
    reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)

Obtén tu clave API →

Preguntas frecuentes

¿Cuál es más barato, Dola Seed 2.0 Pro o Claude Sonnet 5.5?

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro es más barato en entrada / 1m tokens ($0.5 vs $2, con una diferencia de 4.0×). Otras filas pueden indicar lo contrario - la tabla anterior muestra la ficha completa, y el costo real depende de su combinación.

¿Puedo hacer pruebas A/B de Dola Seed 2.0 Pro frente a Claude Sonnet 5.5 sin dos integraciones?

Sí. Ambos se sirven a través del mismo endpoint compatible con OpenAI con una clave API - el cambio es una modificación de una línea en la cadena del modelo, por lo que puede enrutar una fracción del tráfico a cada uno y comparar las facturas directamente.

¿Admiten Dola Seed 2.0 Pro y Claude Sonnet 5.5 caché de prompts?

Sí - ambos cobran las lecturas en caché por debajo de su tarifa de entrada, por lo que las cargas de trabajo con prefijo caliente cuestan menos de lo que sugieren las tarifas de lista. Las filas exactas de lectura en caché están en la tabla de precios de arriba.

Comparaciones relacionadas

De nuestros estudios medidos